Identity of serial sex offender remains secret for now

A serial sex offender who has lost name suppression bids at every level of the legal system — including the Supreme Court — won’t be named for another two months or so.

He was a teenager when he raped, sexually assaulted and indecently assaulted teenage girls, some of whom he went to school with.

The crime took place between 2017 and 2020, when he was 14 to 17 years old. He pleaded guilty to all ten charges and was sentenced in April 2022.

Now 21, he has almost completed a two-year prison sentence, consisting of a year of house arrest and a year of post-detention conditions, including counseling and therapy.

Three young victims who waived their own right to automatic name suppression previously called the suppression an ongoing insult and said today the decision was “bittersweet.”

New Zealand’s highest court had issued an embargo order allowing the media to publish his name at 4pm today. However, new orders from the court this afternoon mean that his naming has been postponed again.

The court says the reasons for the further delay will be provided at a later date.

The man’s lawyers have argued during his bid to have the name removed that he will face extreme hardship and/or that his safety will be jeopardized if he is identified.

Concerns had also been raised about a further deterioration in his mental health, especially given his autism, should he be identified.

In addition, an individual associated with the man (but unrelated to his perpetrator) also sought name suppression for themselves on the grounds that publication would cause them unnecessary hardship (a lower threshold than extreme hardship for the perpetrator). If that suppression was allowed, the perpetrator argued that his name should also be suppressed to prevent identification of the connected person.

The Court of Appeal accepted the connected person’s request to suppress the name, but did not consider suppressing the perpetrator’s name necessary to protect the connected person from unnecessary trouble.

Both the associated person and the perpetrator appealed to the Supreme Court.

In a press release, the Supreme Court said it is the first time it has specifically addressed the importance of juvenile justice principles and how they interact with the principle of open justice.

The charges were filed in Juvenile Court, where the perpetrator’s name was automatically removed. However, some of the charges were transferred to the district court because he was 17 at the time of the offense on those charges, including charges of sexual abuse.

Once in court, name suppression is handled under the Criminal Procedure Act. The man’s lawyers argued that there should be a presumption in favor of youth oppression.

The Supreme Court noted that youth principles should be given “strong weight” in delisting decisions. However, the law does not provide for a presumption in favor of young people and that it is up to Parliament to make changes to name suppression laws.

The Supreme Court agreed with the Supreme Court’s conclusion that the threshold of extreme hardship had not been met. The High Court said it was “clearly right that there is a public interest in the public identification of (the perpetrator)”. It agreed with both the court and the Supreme Court that it involved a “serious crime” over an extended period of time and involved a number of victims.

The Supreme Court also rejected the related person’s appeal to delete the perpetrator’s name.

The interim name suppression of the perpetrator will last until June 14, 2024 or earlier by order of the court.